Firmware 4.5

[Cosmacelf]

I understand and tolerate errors in grammar and spelling from other forum members. I was pointing out an error within the Tesla 4.5 update documentation... hoping that someone from Tesla would see the error and correct it before they release the update.

+1 ITSELE - maybe you could just email Tesla telling them that their yet to be released release notes are going to have a grammar error in them, and could they fix it? Could be an amusing email...

 

[zax123]

+1 ITSELE - maybe you could just email Tesla telling them that their yet to be released release notes are going to have a grammar error in them, and could they fix it? Could be an amusing email...

I say you send it. It's always fun to talk to the ownership people. They are usually very responsive with my emails, and as a "community" we should all help out to make Tesla that much better -- even when it comes to grade three English grammar.

 

[Todd Burch]

Hmm...let's not waste the developers' time going into their code management program, checking out the release notes, fixing a stupid little grammar error, and checking it back in. I'd rather let them work on wifi implementation.

Can we please let them focus on the important stuff?

Oh, and by the way, can we do the same in this thread?

 

[Puyallup Bill]

Something that nobody has brought up, is the effect that lower charges might have on pack balancing. Some roadsters had a big problem with this, and had to be range charged/left to sit a few times in order to get the pack back into balance.

Good point.

Old Roadster post addresses the balance issue - N.B. the 6th paragraph. I suspect that the batteries and battery management systems are similar.
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/3848-Tesla-Roadster-Battery-Care

 

[andrewket]

Speaking of wifi...

 

[ClearwaterBchSteve]

Using utility power to run systems, maintain battery temp, etc. rather than draining/recharging battery should be a big plus for extending battery life! Looking forward to that feature. If Standard charge is best for the battery, why would we need or want to charge it to "less" than that? Is it better to charge the battery to lower levels if that's all we need for a daily commute? If so, then yes of course, I welcome that feature too.

 

[gregincal]

Agreed they should include some guidance but I think it can be a few simple rules of thumb.

1. Don't leave the car sitting at high SOC for long periods of time.

2. Charge to what you plan to use the next day.

3. Give yourself a buffer so you don't risk running out of charge.

For example, if you plan to drive over 200 miles, charge to 100%. If you know you'll be driving less than 70 miles, charge to 50%.

Maintaining a lower SOC is better for battery life but comes with a trade-off of less range. The slider is a great addition which lets owners manage this trade-off based on how they plan to use the car. I'm sure it'll still default to the equivalent of a Standard Charge for those who don't worry about their range.

I agree we just need a few simple rules of thumb, but I just want to know what they are. Driving with your battery starting at 50% and ending at 10% daily may do more damage to the battery than storing it at 90% (driving at low states of charge is hard on the battery).

 

[pete8314]

Agreed they should include some guidance but I think it can be a few simple rules of thumb.

1. Don't leave the car sitting at high SOC for long periods of time.

2. Charge to what you plan to use the next day.

3. Give yourself a buffer so you don't risk running out of charge.

For example, if you plan to drive over 200 miles, charge to 100%. If you know you'll be driving less than 70 miles, charge to 50%.

Maintaining a lower SOC is better for battery life but comes with a trade-off of less range. The slider is a great addition which lets owners manage this trade-off based on how they plan to use the car. I'm sure it'll still default to the equivalent of a Standard Charge for those who don't worry about their range.

I get what you're saying, but this goes against the guiding principle that was hammered into me when I first got interested in EV's, which was to charge whenever and wherever you can, so that you're always prepared for the unexpected. It's also not at all 'consumer friendly'. I fully charge my phone every night, overnight, and I fully charge my iPad every few days, as required. If I only charged it to 20% each day to cover my average usage, that might extend the battery life, but it would be super inconvenient. As a regular consumer (i.e. not an early adoptor,or someone that really cares whether is gas of electrons that make the car move), I'd want a simple rule of thumb, that's not inconvenient, otherwise I just won't do it.

Right now, I charge twice a week, and that works well for me, but I'm still not sure if that's good for the battery, bad for it, or neutral, since my average SOC is probably about 50% across the week.

 

[montgom626]

I agree we just need a few simple rules of thumb, but I just want to know what they are. Driving with your battery starting at 50% and ending at 10% daily may do more damage to the battery than storing it at 90% (driving at low states of charge is hard on the battery).

This is such a good observation. I hope folks take it to heart and just plug in their EV whenever they have the chance to plug in. Running at 85% is better than running at 10%.

 

[Babylonfive]

I agree we just need a few simple rules of thumb, but I just want to know what they are. Driving with your battery starting at 50% and ending at 10% daily may do more damage to the battery than storing it at 90% (driving at low states of charge is hard on the battery).

Greg,

I think the 'discharge curve depth' is absolute, related to the pack SOC and corresponding voltage, and not related to the current SOC max or even the SOC average (as in when charging to a lower SOC under v4.5 controls).

I do agree that we need to understand how much discharging to the low end of the SOC/voltage hurts, compared to fully charging hurts. I wouldn't expect to charge to 50%, then discharge down... I personally would like to float right in the middle, maintaining a 50% charge-time product. You'd charge up as late as possible, to wherever you must to then discharge over the likely trip that day, ending below 50% awaiting the next days charge. Because the time spent charged up is only 8-10 hours, and the time spent waiting for charging or charging is nearly double that, my guess is that you'd shoot higher for the end-charge level.

A 30% daily average could maybe go from 70% down to 40%, intending to spend the average longest time at or nearest 50%.

 

[DavidM]

Map rotation should be done locally in the car - and not require a new download as the car turns. I've had this in my Toyota/Lexus nav systems - and the Tegra processors in the Model S should be able to handle the rotation.

Me too. That's why Toyota/Lexus wants to sell you the overpriced DVD every year. If you don't buy the DVD, your map and NAV will be quickly outdated.

 

[highfalutintodd]

I get what you're saying, but this goes against the guiding principle that was hammered into me when I first got interested in EV's, which was to charge whenever and wherever you can, so that you're always prepared for the unexpected. It's also not at all 'consumer friendly'....... As a regular consumer (i.e. not an early adoptor,or someone that really cares whether is gas of electrons that make the car move), I'd want a simple rule of thumb, that's not inconvenient, otherwise I just won't do it.

Absolutely. Nobody adds only as much gas as they're going to need (maybe as much as they can afford, but that's a different story) and it shouldn't be any different with electrons. If EVs are going to go mainstream and not stay just a curious oddity, you'd better be able to just plug in and forget about it.

 

[jomo25]

Absolutely. Nobody adds only as much gas as they're going to need (maybe as much as they can afford, but that's a different story) and it shouldn't be any different with electrons. If EVs are going to go mainstream and not stay just a curious oddity, you'd better be able to just plug in and forget about it.

Agreed. It's why I think it should default to 93 ( what standard is now) and offer simple warnings if you set it higher or below something like 50%

Anything more is overkill and possibly confusing to the average person IMO. Those who know more, can find out more.

 

[lolachampcar]

This is way to close to Tesla's bread and butter. They do this better than anyone else so I suspect they have looked at the issues surrounding the slider and will come out with good guidance for its usage (I hope).

 

[djp]

I get what you're saying, but this goes against the guiding principle that was hammered into me when I first got interested in EV's, which was to charge whenever and wherever you can, so that you're always prepared for the unexpected. It's also not at all 'consumer friendly'. I fully charge my phone every night, overnight, and I fully charge my iPad every few days, as required. If I only charged it to 20% each day to cover my average usage, that might extend the battery life, but it would be super inconvenient. As a regular consumer (i.e. not an early adoptor,or someone that really cares whether is gas of electrons that make the car move), I'd want a simple rule of thumb, that's not inconvenient, otherwise I just won't do it.

Right now, I charge twice a week, and that works well for me, but I'm still not sure if that's good for the battery, bad for it, or neutral, since my average SOC is probably about 50% across the week.

For regular consumers I'm sure the slider will still default to the equivalent of a Standard charge and most people will just set it and forget it. But for those who want to maximize their battery life by avoiding degradation caused by high SOC, and understand the trade-offs with range, at least Tesla now gives them a tool to do so. And if you're putting the car away for the winter, you can now dial it down to 30% and keep it plugged in as Storage mode.

I don't think the slider makes life more complicated. Most people will continue to use the defaults. Those who want to tweak the settings to suit their driving style now have the option. It's a win-win feature.

Your charge twice a week is just fine for the battery, you're keeping a low average SOC without running it to zero. Model S has much better protection against bricking at low SOC than the Roadster, so there's less of a need to religiously keep it at a high SOC.

 

[Banahogg]

I've read a couple of places about a new EPA rule averaging standard and range charges (2013 Nissan Leaf: 75-Mile Range 'Anticipated' In New Test By EPA for example) - I wonder if the slider could be a legal workaround to keep the good stated range numbers while still letting users reduce battery wear?

I haven't been able to find any actual EPA documentation on the rule from a little searching though, so take this theory with an even larger grain of salt than normal.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

I've read a couple of places about a new EPA rule averaging standard and range charges (2013 Nissan Leaf: 75-Mile Range 'Anticipated' In New Test By EPA for example) - I wonder if the slider could be a legal workaround to keep the good stated range numbers while still letting users reduce battery wear?

I haven't been able to find any actual EPA documentation on the rule from a little searching though, so take this theory with an even larger grain of salt than normal.

I did wonder about that, but I believe the EPA keeps it simple on this one: (recommended+max)/2.

 

[Banahogg]

I did wonder about that, but I believe the EPA keeps it simple on this one: (recommended+max)/2.

What would they do if Tesla just says something like "we recommend you set it as low as you can to fit your expected driving about 30%" or something? I'd still love to see the actual rule.

 

[scottf200]

I've read a couple of places about a new EPA rule averaging standard and range charges (2013 Nissan Leaf: 75-Mile Range 'Anticipated' In New Test By EPA for example) - I wonder if the slider could be a legal workaround to keep the good stated range numbers while still letting users reduce battery wear? I haven't been able to find any actual EPA documentation on the rule from a little searching though, so take this theory with an even larger grain of salt than normal.

I have not seen it either and there are questions how it works since the Chevrolet Spark has an EPA figure of 82.

Here is the "Electric Vehicles" EPA labels description layout: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/label/learn-more-electric-label.shtml

 

[ohmslaw]

100% should correspond to what is currently a standard charge. 110% should be range charge. This helps people understand that they should normally charge to standard, and that range charge is for special circumstances. If people are supposed to understand that they should normally charge to 93% or something, that will never work.